Judgments - Supreme Court of India
EXCEL DEALCOMM PVT. LTD. Vs. ASSET RECONST. COMPANY (INDIA) LTD. & OR
BALASAHEB ARJUN TORBOLE & ORS. Vs. THE ADMINISTRATOR & DIVNL.COMMR.& ORS.
STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. SAURABH BAKSHI
It is sometimes said in an egocentric and uncivilised manner that law cannot bind the individual actions which are perceived as flaws by the large body of people, but, the truth is and has to be that when the law withstands the test of the constitutional scrutiny in a democracy, the individual notions are to be ignored. It is the duty of Full Judgment
P.R.YELUMALAI Vs. N.M.RAVI
However, we find that after the execution Court had dismissed the execution proceeding on the ground of delay in depositing the amount, the same question was dealt with by the original side of the Trial Court as well in the application for extension of time. Since both the Courts have given concurrent findings that the case for extension of time was not made out, we Full Judgment
RANBEER SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. Vs. STATE OF U.P.& ORS
The main contention is that when the case of prosecution has been believed and relied upon by the High Court and on that basis the main accused Shyamu is convicted, the present three respondents cannot be acquitted. Therefore, the only question before us is whether, in the given facts and circumstances the case, the role attributed to the present three Accused-respondents lead to Full Judgment
UMRALA GRAM PANCHAYAT Vs. THE SEC.MUNICIPAL EMPLOYEE UNION & ORS
They have also been working for similar number of hours, however, the discrepancy in the payment of wages/salary between the permanent and the non-permanent workmen is alarming and the same has to be construed as being an unfair labour practice as defined under Section 2(ra) of the ID Act r/w Entry No.10 of the Fifth Schedule to the ID Act, which is prohibited under Section 25(T) of the ID Full Judgment
ASHA VERMAN & ORS. Vs. MAHARAJ SINGH & ORS.
On applying the principles as laid down in the case of Sarla Verma (supra), 50% of the salary must be added to the income of the deceased towards future prospects of income, which comes to Rs.6,900/- per month, i.e. Rs.82,800/- per annum. Deducting 1/4th for personal expenses and applying the appropriate multiplier taking into consideration the age of Full Judgment
DHOLE GOVIND SAHEBRAO & ORS. Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
VED MITTER GILL Vs. U.T. ADMINISTRATION, CHANDIGARH & ORS
A. RAGHU, SON OF RAJAIAH Vs. GOVT. OF A.P. & ORS.
The judgments cited pertain to the particular rule of seniority, which was subject matter of consideration. None of the seniority rules which were taken into consideration is akin to rule 15 which is to be applied for determining the inter se seniority of Sub- Inspectors of Police, in the present case. Full Judgment
S. SATYANARAYANA VERSUS ENERGO MASCH POWER ENGINEERING & CONSULTING PVT. LTD. & ORS
DASHMESH EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY Vs. PUNJAB URBAN DEVE.AUTHORITY & ORS.
MOHAN SINGH GILL & ORS. ETC. ETC. Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. ETC. ETC.
AGRICULTURAL INCOME TAX OFFICER & ANR. Vs. GOODRICKE GROUP LTD. & ANR.
SHREYA SINGHAL VERSUS UNION OF INDIA
This batch of writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India raises very important and far-reaching questions relatable primarily to the fundamental right of free speech and expression guaranteed by Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. The immediate cause for concern in these petitions is Section 66A of the Information Technology Act of 2000. 119. Full Judgment